Gérard Depardieu - Tax dodger

[Zingari]

It's a queer old world an' no mistake when people start fleeing to Russia to escape socialism.

[Jon the Hat]

So you're using euros and a number that Depardieu claims to have paid since the age of 14 and that's still not hundreds is it?

More than enough to make my point entirely valid.

[Deucalion]

What's that supposed to mean?

It's a play on an 'Animal Farm' quote.

It's a queer old world an' no mistake when people start fleeing to Russia to escape socialism.

[Rincewind]

Typical socialist bullshit.

Yes I'm afraid thinking about those worse off than yourself is a totally socialist and evil concept.

Why is it OK for someone with millions to dodge taxes yet not for someone with nothing trying to feed and clothe their children?

[Jon the Hat]

Yes I'm afraid thinking about those worse off than yourself is a totally socialist and evil concept.

Why is it OK for someone with millions to dodge taxes yet not for someone with nothing trying to feed and clothe their children?

He was quite happily paying taxes, huge amounts. The Government chooses to increase the tax rate to a level akin to theft then he has every right to move to another country. You said he expected other people to pay for his lifestyle, and that is bullshit. You make no attempt to justify your comment. How is the man in the street in France paying for GDs lifestyle??

[Deucalion]

He was quite happily paying taxes, huge amounts. The Government chooses to increase the tax rate to a level akin to theft then he has every right to move to another country. You said he expected other people to pay for his lifestyle, and that is bullshit. You make no attempt to justify your comment. How is the man in the street in France paying for GDs lifestyle??

By watching his films?

Let's face it, he hasn't become rich from a profession of any particular use to society has he? Part of the crime is that an actor becomes hugely wealthy while those that do benefit society earn a pittance.

[breadandcheese]

By watching his films?

Let's face it, he hasn't become rich from a profession of any particular use to society has he? Part of the crime is that an actor becomes hugely wealthy while those that do benefit society earn a pittance.

Russian citizens also watch his movies, so maybe it's only fair that he pays a bit of tax there now

Genuine question: What rate do you consider it a fair proportion of income to pay as tax? If you work hard, how much of your labour should you pay as tax?

[Carl the Llama]

He was quite happily paying taxes, huge amounts. The Government chooses to increase the tax rate to a level akin to theft then he has every right to move to another country. You said he expected other people to pay for his lifestyle, and that is bullshit. You make no attempt to justify your comment. How is the man in the street in France paying for GDs lifestyle??

That's so easy to answer, so I'll give you some hints: He's an actor. He works in the film industry. He's in many french movies.

Besides, you have to very greedy to see having to pay extra tax at certain thresholds as a problem in a society where incomes are notoriously unbalanced from profession to profession and sector to sector.

French tax rates:

Table: French Income Tax Bands - 2012

Income Share Tax Rate Up to €5,963 0% Between €5,964 - €11,896 5.5% Between €11,897 - €26,420 14% Between €26,421 - €70,830 30% Above €70,830 41%

These same rates will apply for 2013, for income earned in 2012, save that for there will be a new rate of tax of 45% for income in excess of €150,000.

In addition, from 2012 (income 2011) those fortunate few with an annual income (revenu fiscal de référence) of upwards of €250,000 are liable for a special tax calledcontribution exceptionnelle sur les hauts revenus of 3% on income up to €500,000, while those with an income above €500,000 will pay at the rate of 4% on any income above the threshold.

[Deucalion]

Russian citizens also watch his movies, so maybe it's only fair that he pays a bit of tax there now

Genuine question: What rate do you consider it a fair proportion of income to pay as tax? If you work hard, how much of your labour should you pay as tax?

That's an interesting and difficult to answer question. I don't think anybody likes paying income tax.

But...surely it is worth paying a percentage of your income on tax if it means a decent healthcare system, decent education, decent roads, decent defence, decent treatment of the elderly...and so on.

I admire the Scandinavian countries where it is the norm to have high rates of tax and the population accepts this must be paid to ensure they live in a decent society.

In the USA, tax rates are quite low. This means people are able to keep and spend a large percentage of their income but...they do not live in a decent society. In the most rich and powerful country on Earth, around 40 million people live in poverty!

The big mistake people who see themselves as well off make is to think they can keep their wealth and ignore social problems. Well, crime, protest, murder are all contributed to by social issues not being dealt with.

To answer the question as best I can, I would like to pay the lowest amount of tax which would allow all to receive decent healthcare, all children to have an opportunity to fulfil their potential, the elderly are rewarded for a lifetime of hard work with respect and dignity...and so on and so on and so on.

What percentage would achieve this? I do not have the ability or the data to work it out.

[The People's Hero]

Jon the Hat is spot on. France will get what is coming. He won't be the last. Good on him.

[MooseBreath]

By watching his films?

Let's face it, he hasn't become rich from a profession of any particular use to society has he? Part of the crime is that an actor becomes hugely wealthy while those that do benefit society earn a pittance.

How do you define "use to society"? I reckon the fact that so many people have decided to spend their own money on seeing his films is a pretty strong vote in favour of his use to society. You may prefer that society thought otherwise but unfortunately you don't get to make that decision.

[Guest BlueBrett]

Yes I'm afraid thinking about those worse off than yourself is a totally socialist and evil concept.

Why is it OK for someone with millions to dodge taxes yet not for someone with nothing trying to feed and clothe their children

Do you really think that being reluctant to pay extortionate taxes to a squanderous government is indicative of heartlessness? Maybe you think that if all the 'greedy rich folk' paid 'their fair share' then our benevolent leaders around the world would be empowered to get together and relieve all human suffering? Maybe you don't know what you think and you're just tired and confused.

Anyone with any amount of money is entitled to go live in a different country providing they fulfil citizenship/visa requirements - as I'm sure you would recall if you weren't all excited by bitterness.

[leicsmac]

Do you really think that being reluctant to pay extortionate taxes to a squanderous government is indicative of heartlessness? Maybe you think that if all the 'greedy rich folk' paid 'their fair share' then our benevolent leaders around the world would be empowered to get together and relieve all human suffering? Maybe you don't know what you think and you're just tired and confused.

Anyone with any amount of money is entitled to go live in a different country providing they fulfil citizenship/visa requirements - as I'm sure you would recall if you weren't all excited by bitterness.

Unfortunately there's a nugget of reality buried in here.

Even if there was a universal tax rate, with the world acting as one agenda, it's still likely there would be corrupt individuals who would siphon extra off for themselves, and money may not go to all the right places. We simply haven't overcome the evolutionary principle of getting one over on those around you in order to boost our chances of genetic continuance enough yet.

If there was global governance/taxation, complete electability and democracy, along with complete transparent accountability for every penny spent, would be the only way. And think of the bureaucracy that would result from that.

Choosing between two evils, really.

(But I still think the idea of the nation-state has had its time.)

[Rincewind]

I am not against people having a good life if they pay the right taxes. It's the notion that those at the bottom of the ladder who use loopholes for a bit extra money mainly to put food on the table are much worse than the higher earners who use the loopholes to pay for another yacht in Marbella harbour. One is called scroungers the other is praised. That does not make a fair society. And why does that make me a socialist? I have no party affiliation.

[Jon the Hat]

I am not against people having a good life if they pay the right taxes. It's the notion that those at the bottom of the ladder who use loopholes for a bit extra money mainly to put food on the table are much worse than the higher earners who use the loopholes to pay for another yacht in Marbella harbour. One is called scroungers the other is praised. That does not make a fair society. And why does that make me a socialist? I have no party affiliation.

Well why are you chipping in to this conversation then? He has paid all the taxes required of him, and now he chooses to excercise his right to move to another country which welcomes him because he dislikes a policy of his government. Wanting people the rich to pau punitive tax rates makes you a socialist.

[ADK]

The problem with taxation/public spending is most of the taxes are taken from high earners but most of the public spending is spent on the country as a whole. There's a valid arguement that those high earners benefit from good public infrastructure, if you are a businessman that owns a factory for example, you need skilled and healthy workers, so public education and healthcare benefit you. As do a whole load of other things. I don't have an issue with heavy taxation of the most wealthy from a moral standpoint, but how do you motivate people to generate more wealth when they are being taxed so heavily?

[Zingari]

The problem with taxation/public spending is most of the taxes are taken from high earners but most of the public spending is spent on the country as a whole. There's a valid arguement that those high earners benefit from good public infrastructure, if you are a businessman that owns a factory for example, you need skilled and healthy workers, so public education and healthcare benefit you. As do a whole load of other things. I don't have an issue with heavy taxation of the most wealthy from a moral standpoint, but how do you motivate people to generate more wealth when they are being taxed so heavily?

use a fookin big whip

[Webbo]

http://ykyuen.files....thers.jpg?w=584

It's a play on an 'Animal Farm' quote.

I'm aware of the quote. I didn't like the implication that if you're rightwing you automatically hate everyone and that if you're leftwing you are somehow morally superior.

[Jon the Hat]

I'm aware of the quote. I didn't like the implication that if you're rightwing you automatically hate everyone and that if you're leftwing you are somehow morally superior.

I find the opposite to be true. Most people on the right have a social conscience, and don't tell others what to do or how to think. The left on the other hand think they have some moral superiority that borders on the evangelical. *

* blatant generalisation of course, but that seems to be the game in this thread

[FoxyPV]

I though people in the centre were the ones with the halos and everyone else ate baby entrails.

[leicsmac]

Everyone believes their own perspective is right. That's why they express it. And it'd be a funny world if we were all the same, wouldn't it?

I find the opposite to be true. Most people on the right have a social conscience, and don't tell others what to do or how to think. The left on the other hand think they have some moral superiority that borders on the evangelical. *

* blatant generalisation of course, but that seems to be the game in this thread

I think authoritarianism (telling people what to do or think) can be both right and left wing-based.

Ideally there would be some form of system that would preserve individuality and freedoms of choice, speech, expression etc whilst having enough governmental management to supply everyone with quality of life that is deemed universally acceptable. Across the world.

[Jon the Hat]

Everyone believes their own perspective is right. That's why they express it. And it'd be a funny world if we were all the same, wouldn't it?

I think authoritarianism (telling people what to do or think) can be both right and left wing-based.

Ideally there would be some form of system that would preserve individuality and freedoms of choice, speech, expression etc whilst having enough governmental management to supply everyone with quality of life that is deemed universally acceptable. Across the world.

For some reason, it is not acceptable to tell people what to do for Right ring reasons (rightly so), but it is apparently for left wing reasons.

[leicsmac]

For some reason, it is not acceptable to tell people what to do for Right ring reasons (rightly so), but it is apparently for left wing reasons.

Perhaps because left-wing views tend to be more geared towards benefiting a large (or larger) amount of people in the short term and therefore seem (on the surface) to be more altruistic? Not true, of course, since this comes at the price of higher cost at an individual level. Either way, someone has to pay. And also, possibly because right-wing authoritarianism is directly associated with fascism in this country, and is therefore stigmatised, whereas left-wing authoritarianism (grotesque as it has been in the past) does not have the same stigma?

I personally dislike authoritarianism of any kind (given that kind of government has committed the very worst kind of atrocities in the history of mankind), but at the same time I like the idea of public transport being cheap and regular, and being taken ill and not having to worry about how much it's going to cost, thanks to an Authority that manages these things. Paradoxical, I know....but I would imagine there are many others who think the same. Guess the key thing is balance.

Oh, and Churchill had it right. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And as in todays society money tends to = power, I'm not sure how comfortable I am with the vast majority of the worlds wealth in the hands of a few individuals, none of whom have been elected but all of whom have considerable political power.

[Deucalion]

I'm aware of the quote. I didn't like the implication that if you're rightwing you automatically hate everyone and that if you're leftwing you are somehow morally superior.

Tough

[Jon the Hat]

Tough

You just make yourself look like an angry twat with a chip on their shoulder.